In Montana, a controversial $2B pipeline hits a speed bump

A $2 billion, 650-mile pipeline expansion project in Montana has encountered a hurdle in its permitting process. Dubbed the Bridger Pipeline Expansion, the project is one of three proposed legs connecting oil sands in Alberta, Canada to Cushing, Oklahoma. Bridger Pipeline Expansion, LLC, a subsidiary of Wyoming-based True Companies, aims to commence construction by July 2027, pending state and federal approval. However, the project has hit a stumbling block.

The Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) recently withdrew a waiver it had given the pipeline, which allowed the company to omit certain financial and environmental data from its application. This waiver was granted in February, but DEQ has now reversed course. The environmental law firm Earthjustice has filed a complaint on behalf of two Montana residents against DEQ's decision, arguing that the waived information is crucial for a comprehensive review.

The project has been dubbed "Keystone Light" due to its similarities to the Keystone XL Pipeline, which was cancelled by then-President Joe Biden in 2021. At full capacity, the pipeline would transport 1.13 million barrels of crude tar sands oil per day. Opponents have raised concerns over the potential environmental impacts, noting that the pipeline would cross water 150 times.

They argue that pipelines leak, and it is not a matter of if, but when. They also point out that the pipeline's route would pass through sensitive ecosystems, posing a significant climate threat.

The Montana Major Facility Siting Act, which outlines the process of evaluating the impacts of large energy projects, played a role in this situation. The project requested a waiver to omit certain financial and economic information, and baseline environmental data, as permitted by the law. However, DEQ has now reinstated the requirement for this information.

This decision has been seen as a positive step by some, as it ensures the project adheres to Montana law. However, critics argue that the agency should have been more proactive in informing the public about the waiver earlier.